Testing Report

Designer of Commercial Vessels USCG COI & Classed
Phone 228-863-1772 202 Alyce Pl.

Long Beach, MS 39560
Email ~ ed@emcsq.com
EMCsq 2004
Ed Carlsen
03/04/2005
REPORT ON TESTING OF INCLINE METHODS

FOR
WEIGHT MOVEMENTS and LOADCELL MOVEMENTS
BY
TESTING IN A CONTROLED ENVIORMENT & TEST TANK
MEMBER
The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, American Society of Naval Engineers, International Association of Marine Investigators
QUALIFIED by the MISSISSIPPI GAMING COMMISSION: AUTHORIZED by the LOUISIANA RIVER BOAT GAMING DIVISION
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

CONTEXT
ITEM:
PAGE:
Testing Overview
Theory of Weight Procedure
Theory of Loadcell Procedure
TEST TANK & EQUIPMENT
TANK SETUP & TEST START
INCLINE OF TUBE
I
NCLI
NEOFBa
ke
r
sPan
11
INCLINE OF Liftboat Replica Model
17
ARGUMENT
24
SUMMATION
24
Conclusion
26
2 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha
Testing Overview
The testing was devised to create a controlled environment and testing of different shaped hull styles. Its mission
was to ascertain the true properties of the heeling action against the hull in both traditional weight movement
incline and the loadcell movement incline. By carefully recording the rise or fall of the water line, in the test tank,
it could be ascertained if a change in the volume of displacement was occurring and to what amount along with
if it was a gain or loss, still keeping in mind that the actual weight of the vessel did not change. There were three
types of hull configurations tested,
1st wa
sac
y
l
i
ndr
i
c
a
l(
t
ube
)s
ha
peve
s
s
e
lt
ha
tc
or
r
e
s
pondswi
t
hour
The
or
i
e
sofi
nc
l
i
nepa
g
e
l
a
ter in this
presentation,
2nd was a Bakers Pan that the side walls were set to such an angle that there would be no change in the
water line plane of the vessel at any angle,
3rd was a true replica model of a liftboat.
The goal of the testing was to prove out what method of inclining a vessel would produce the most accurate
results by eliminating false assumptions, human error, pre-loading of the water plane and/or volume
displacement and ease of implementation.
The result of the testing follows with some very interesting data obtained. The test was run for the results of the
incline itself as per the method used, it was felt that lightship values were not necessary since that is a function of
calculation only. The setup of the test comparison was to first incline the vessel with weights as per normal
ASTM procedures to obtain the degree of heel at the given moment. All data was recorded on an Excel spread
sheet set up for computation of said data to give results on the gain or loss of volume, weight of water contained in
that volume, moment and degree. The spreadsheet also contains a section to record the hydrostatics results
produced by said raw data.
The next step was to re-set the vessel for the loadcell method of incline; all test instruments remained the same.
The incline weights were removed for the test and the vessel was then placed into the test tank for volume
displacement measurement then zeroed for the test. The vessel was then inclined with the loadcell method
matching the degree of heel produced by the weight method as close a possible. All results were recorded as per
the weight method for a comparison of results.
Note: the surface level measurement shown in the results that have a(-) in front of it is showing an INCREASE
in water line level thus showing the vessel to deepen its draft. Also note that all calculations for moment are in
LB & FT. as well as all results in FT due to our Hydrostatics program.
Theory of Weight Procedure
Customarily the incline experiment is conducted by the introduction of weight to the vessel. Weights are placed
at predetermined stations and the angle of heel is recorded. Once this is done, the heeling moment is compared to
the angle of heel and a vertical center of gravity is calculated. This is a proven method and has been in use for
several hundred years. It is, however, subject to any number of inaccuracies as well as hazards to personnel and
equipment.
Theory of Loadcell Procedure
The procedure for the use of a loadcell in lieu of weights is quite simple in principle. A loadcell is attached to
the vessel at the sheer and a small crane or other device is used to produce a heeling action, in this method the
precise angle desired could be obtained. The resulting Righting Moment produced by the Vessel is measured
3 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

by the loadcell and recorded just as the movement of the weights in the conventional incline experiment. Since
the distance of the loadcell from centerline remains constant, the heeling moment is easy to calculate to an
accuracy that could never be achieved with the movement of weights on the deck.
TEST TANK & EQUIPMENT:
8 9
1
11
1:
10
Te
s
tTa
n
k
;3
3x2
2
x7
, Water surface area as shown for testing is 741.125 square inches. Water
SG is 1 with a density of 62.42.
2:
Li
n
e
a
rd
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
me
n
tt
r
a
n
s
d
u
c
e
r
;c
a
l
i
b
r
a
t
e
da
to
n
ei
n
c
ho
ft
o
t
a
lt
r
a
v
e
l(
+0
.
5
/
-0
.
5
)
.
Li
n
e
a
r
i
t
yo
fu
n
i
ti
s.23% as NIST
testing, accuracy cali
br
a
t
i
ont
h
e
nf
r
om
0i
st
h
e
n0.
00115i
nt
ot
a
lt
r
a
v
e
l
.Fl
oa
ti
ss
t
a
n
da
r
dpl
a
s
t
i
ct
oi
l
e
tba
l
l
.
3:
Sc
a
l
eSl
i
deMe
c
h
a
n
i
s
m;Un
i
ti
sc
on
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
dt
oa
c
ta
sac
r
a
n
ef
ort
h
es
c
a
l
eu
n
i
t
.I
tt
r
a
v
e
l
sonaba
l
lbe
a
r
i
n
g
Ve
e
grooved slider; the slider is raised and lowered by rotating a screw of 832 inch thread to increase or decrease the load and
angle of degree of heel.
4:
Scale; Model CS 200 OHAUS, Capacity 200g x 0.1g or readout to 0.00 oz. Calibrated by Alabama Scale Company
and certified accurate. The scale is used to measure the load applied to the test vessel at the degree of incline indicated.
5:
Holder Arm & Cable for the degree indicator # 6
4 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

6:
An
g
l
eSt
a
rPr
ot
r
a
c
t
orSy
s
t
e
m;NI
ST c
e
r
t
i
f
i
e
da
n
g
l
ef
i
n
de
r
,r
e
a
di
n
gi
n0.
00de
g
r
e
e
,a
dj
u
s
t
a
bl
et
o
0
,Readout unit
connected to AccuStar Electronic Clinometer (not pictured) by cable (#5), the AEC is firmly attached to the vessel being
tested.
7:
Readout & controller for # 2, readout set to 0.00000 of an inch.
8:
Lead test weights.
9:
Scale; Model CS 2000 OHAUS, Capacity 2000g x 1g or readout to 0 lb 0.00 oz. Calibrated by Alabama Scale Company and
certified accurate. The scale is used to measure the load applied to the test vessel at the degree of incline indicated.
10:
Steel test weights.
11:
Steel incline weights. TANK
SETUP & TEST START

A:
Tank is filled to the appropriate level and allowed to reach room temperature.
B:
Af
t
e
r
Ai
sa
c
c
ompl
i
s
h
e
daSGa
n
dt
e
mpe
r
a
t
u
r
er
e
a
di
n
gi
st
a
k
e
na
n
dr
e
c
or
de
d.
C:
Ne
x
tt
h
eLi
n
e
a
r(
#2&7)s
y
s
t
e
mi
s
0t
ot
h
ewa
t
e
rl
e
v
e
lf
ori
n
di
c
a
t
i
onofr
i
s
eorf
a
l
l
.
D:
The vessel being tested is then lowered into the tank, the Linear is allowed to settle and a reading is taken. This reading
will interpolate the volume of displacement of the vessel as sitting in the water. Reading x Surface area will give
additional volume created. Once this is done then the Linear is rezeroed for the testing.
E:
Incline testing by both methods then proceeds with recording the rise or fall of the water level at each incline movement
along with the degree of heel and the moment taken to produce it.
5 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

INCLINE OF TUBE
Picture of TUBE & Setup;
Incline weight
Electronic Clinometer
Loadcell attachment
point
Drawing of TUBE;
TUBE setup;
The tube was made to the specifications as per the drawing above and chosen because of its shape, the shape
adds no resistance to rotation about the axes. The two 4.25 oz weights were added to the tube to give it a VCG
f
o
rt
h
ep
u
r
p
o
s
eo
fi
n
c
l
i
n
i
n
g
.
Th
e1
.
6
8
7
5
n
o
t
c
hwa
sc
r
e
a
t
e
dt
og
i
v
eal
e
v
e
ls
u
r
f
a
c
eo
nwh
i
c
ht
omo
v
et
h
ei
n
c
l
i
n
e
weight. The other notch was created as an opening that the Electronic Clinometer could be installed through. The
location of the centerline of the Electronic Clinometer was mounted as close as possible to the physical
centerline of the tube. The tube was then weigh by scale for a true weight and a set point for comparison by
volume calculations.
6 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha
The tube was then set into the tank for volume measurement and to run the incline test by using the weight
me
t
hod.Thewe
i
g
h
tus
e
di
s#4a
t1.
34oz
,i
twa
smove
dout
boa
r
df
r
om c
e
nt
e
r
l
i
nea
t0.
25i
nt
e
r
va
l
sf
orat
ot
a
lof
five movements. All data was recorded and shown below.
Incline by Weight Method;
The chart below shows the overall results as recorded:
Incline test in tank
VESSEL:
TUBE
Input Cell
Test tank area = 741.125
sq.in.
Water condition
1 Inch to FT.
scale wt = 88
Wt of Water per cu.in = 0.576969
Oz
0.0833
Oz
Input Cell
SG =
1
Item Wt .= 88
water dens:
62.42
Oz
Size = 21.75" loa x 5" Dia. Oa
Surface. Ch = change in tank depth as measured with liner transducer: (-)= increase in height
CID = Cu. In. Disp.
CALCULATIONS by Calculated Displacement Wt. Ch. = weight of water
Start surface 0.20652
CID =153.057135
Wt. Oz =88.30922212
Wt Lb = 5 . 5 1 9 3 2 6
with incline wts on deck
USING WEIGHTS METHOD TO INCLINE
CALCULATIONS
Movement
Deg. Heel surface ch.
CID
Wt. Ch oz
% of total
wt ch lb
cu. Ft.
Wt. Oz
Lb. moment
1~ 4
0.57
-0.00051
-0.377974 -0.218079137
-0.002469 -0.013629946
-0.000218735
1.34
0.08375
0.001742
2~ 4
1.48
-0.00172
-1.274735 -0.735482578
-0.008328 -0.045967661
-0.000737694
1.34
0.08375 0.003492375
3~ 4
2.56
0.00036
0.266805 0.153938214
0.001743 0.009621138
0.000154401
1.34
0.08375 0.005234375
4~ 4
3.49
0.00034
0.251983 0.145386091
0.001646 0.009086631
0.000145823
1.34
0.08375 0.006976375
5~ 4
4.89
0.00063
0.466909 0.269391875
0.003051 0.016836992
0.000270202
1.34
0.08375 0.008718375
6~4
0.00
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
0
0.00
0.00000
0
1" moves
Wt. # 4
1.34
in Oz.
in Oz.
Moment = Ft. x LB
Shown above are the five movements of the tube using a weight to produce the moments and degrees of heel.
Youwi
l
lnot
ei
nt
he
s
ur
f
a
c
ec
h.
Column in movements # 1 & 2 there is an increase in the water line which
translates into an increase in displacement volume, with movements #3 to 5 there is a decrease in waterline
whi
c
ht
r
a
ns
l
a
t
e
si
nt
oade
c
r
e
a
s
ei
ndi
s
pl
a
c
e
me
ntvol
ume
.The
CI
Dc
ol
umnis showing the calculated volume
of increase or decrease of the vessel as calculated by the surface area of the tank verses the amount of the
s
ur
f
a
c
ec
ha
ng
e
.The
ASI
nc
l
i
neTEST1r
e
s
ul
t
sa
r
ea
sc
a
l
c
ul
a
t
e
dbyourhy
dr
os
t
a
t
i
c
spr
og
r
a
ma
nda
r
es
hown
in feet. The average VCG is shown in feet and converted into inches at right to give some assimilation to the
vessel.
In reading the results the following interpolations will be obtained for all movements;
Movement 1~ using weight #4, degree of heel is 0.57, surface change of test tank is 0.
00051whi
c
hme
a
ns
there was an increase (rise) of the water level in the tank, the CID of 0.377974 means that there was an increase
in volume of the tube (deeper draft) of that amount and is expressed as Cubic Inch Displacement (CID) or
expressed as the TUBE increased its volume displacement by 0.377974 to carry the same weight load as applied
by a short leverage arm acting against the axes, the vessel is still carrying the same load weight as in the neutral
position.
7 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Incline by Loadcell Method;
Start surface
Movement
1
2
3
4
5
6
0.20543
CID =
Deg. Heel
0.59
1.50
2.53
3.49
4.89
0.00
152.2493088 Wt. Oz =
87.84313142 Wt Lb =
USING LOADCELL METHOD TO INCLINE
surface ch.
CID
Wt. Ch oz
% of total
wt ch lb
0.00028
0.207515 0.119729722
0.001361 0.007483108
0.00056
0.415030 0.239459444
0.002721 0.014966215
0.00058
0.429853 0.248011567
0.002818 0.015500723
0.00113
0.837471
0.48319495
0.005491 0.030199684
0.00295
2.186319 1.261438143
0.014335 0.078839884
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
5.490195714
cu. Ft.
0.00012009
0.000240179
0.000248757
0.000484648
0.001265231
0
INCHES
2.4375
reading oz
0.24
0.32
0.51
0.65
0.85
0.00
FEET
distance
0.203125
lb
moment
0.0150 0.003046875
0.0200
0.0040625
0.0319 0.006474609
0.0406 0.008251953
0.0531 0.010791016
0.0000
0
Note the Surface ch. Column; there was no gain in displacement volume.
Comparison of both methods;

HEEL DEGREES:
The heeling degrees was kept as close as possible to allow for interpolations. The columns of data in the title
c
e
l
la
r
ena
me
d
wt
mf
orwe
i
g
htme
t
hoda
nd
l
c
mf
orl
oa
dc
e
l
lme
t
hod.
Movement
Wtm Deg.
Heel
Lcm Deg.
Heel
0.57
0.59
1.48
1.50
2.56
2.53
3.49
3.49
4.89
4.89
0.00
0.00
As shown the degree of heel difference was kept to a minimum, with M4

& M5 matching.
SURFACE CHANGE:
The surface of the tank directly corresponds to a change in volume displacement or draft of the object within the
tank. By measuring the change in the level of the tank, the volume gain or loss can be calculated and applied to
the objects gain or loss.
Movement
Wtm surface
ch.
Note the surface change for the Weight Method; the first two
movements had a gain in surface, which means that the TUBE
displaced more volume (deeper draft). The remaining three
0.00028
movements there was a loss in the height of the surface this would
0.00056 be a loss in volume displacement.
Lcm surface
ch.
1: 0.57 0.59
-0.00051
2: 1.48 1.50
-0.00172
3: 2.56 2.53
0.00036
0.00058
4: 3.49 3.49
0.00034
0.00113
5: 4.89 4.89
0.00063
The surface change for the Loadcell Method stayed with a constant
0.00295 loss of surface height, then a constant loss of volume displacement.
0.00000
0.00000
8 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

VOLUME DISPLACEMENT CHANGE:
From the table above the displacement volume of change of the object can be calculated. This change does not
reflect a change in the objects weight but a change in the axis of buoyancy of which the leverage is applied.
Movement
Wtm CID
In the Wtm column you will note the cubic inch displacement gain
or loss. As stated above there was a gain in movements 1& 2, the
0.207515
gain in #2 was very significant as compared to any loss in the
0.415030
following movements.
Lcm CID
1: 0.57 0.59
-0.377974
2: 1.48 1.50
-1.274735
3: 2.56 2.53
0.266805
0.429853
4: 3.49 3.49
0.251983
0.837471
5: 4.89 4.89
0.466909
2.186319
0.000000
0.000000
THE FOLLOWING CHARTS SHOW THE COMPARESON BETWEEN BOTH METHODS.

The data shown was obtained from our hydrostatics program and compiled for easy reference.
CALCULATIONS FOR WATERPLANE AREA CHANGE:
Movement
Wtm WPA
Lcm WPA
1: 0.57 0.59
1.1896
1.1881
2: 1.48 1.50
1.1894
1.1879
3: 2.56 2.53
1.1896
1.1880
4: 3.49 3.49
1.1895
1.1880
5: 4.89 4.89
1.1895
1.1880
0.000000
0.000000
Note in both methods that the waterplane area had changed overall
by 0.0002.
CALCULATIONS FOR VCG, TCB, TCF, TKM:

Wtm
TKM'
Lcm TKM'
0.0009
0.2082
0.2082
0.0023
0.0023
0.2082
0.2082
0.0058
0.0039
0.0039
0.2083
0.2083
0.0080
0.0080
0.0054
0.0054
0.2084
0.2084
0.1855
0.0112
0.0112
0.0075
0.0075
0.2086
0.2086
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Movement
Wtm VCG'
Lcm VCG'
Wtm TCB' Lcm TCB' Wtm TCF' Lcm TCF'
1: 0.57 0.59
0.1780
0.1550
0.0013
0.0014
0.0009
2: 1.48 1.50
0.1840
0.1805
0.0034
0.0035
3: 2.56 2.53
0.1873
0.1820
0.0059
4: 3.49 3.49
0.1877
0.1839
5: 4.89 4.89
0.1899
0.0000
9 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

CALCULATIONS FOR VCB, VCF, DRAFT, VOLUME FT^3:
Deg. Heel
0.57 - 0.59
1.48 - 1.50
2.56 - 2.53
3.49 - 3.49
4.89 - 4.89
0.00
Wtm VCB'
0.0766
0.0767
0.0768
0.0769
0.0771
0.0000
Lcm VCB'
0.0764
0.0764
0.0765
0.0766
0.0769
0.0000
Wtm VCF'
0.1199
0.1199
0.1200
0.1201
0.1202
0.0000
Lcm VCF' Wtm Draft' Lcm Draft Wtm Vol. Ft^3 Lcm Vol. Ft^3
0.1195
0.1190
0.1195
0.0884
0.0880
0.1195
0.1199
0.1195
0.0884
0.0880
0.1196
0.1199
0.1195
0.0884
0.0880
0.1197
0.1199
0.1195
0.0884
0.0880
0.1198
0.1199
0.1195
0.0884
0.0880
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
The above charts show that when the calculations for the various properties of the TUBE were made that there is
no difference in the linearity of the properties results of each method. There is a difference between the two
methods in the VCG. The VCG of the Weight Movement is higher due to the weight of 1.34 oz used to incline
the TUBE, this weight would be backed off in normal calculations but it has already corrupted the data by
artificially changing the properties of the volume displacement verses the axis of rotation.
It should also be noted that using the Loadcell method to incline, the TUBE was inclined in its TRUE lightship
configuration thus allowing for the true movement of the TUBE without any falsely imposed properties of
rotation to be introduced.
Calculation of the average VCG for the two findings are;
Weight Method as Inclined: 0.
1853
or
Loadcell Method:
0.
1773
or
2
.
2
2
4
5
2
.
1
2
8
5
Using the Weight Method the TUBE had to work to over come the imposed extra weight that is not normal to its
true form and properties of buoyancies. The weight caused the TUBE to seek a deeper draft in movements 1 & 2
to compensate for the added leverage to its natural center of buoyancy. The TCB did not have enough volume of
displacement under it to support the weight causing this action. Once the volume of displacement became
sufficient enough in the rest of the movements the properties of the TUBE returned to its natural state but except
for movements 1& 2 at a deeper draft.
Using the Loadcell Method the TUBE is rotated about its axis in its natural state. This provided for a more
accurate VCG of the TUBE. In comparing the calculated results between the two methods you will find that the
TCB, TCF, TKM match (some with interpolation) but the VCG is different for all movements. This is due to the
TUBE not working to overcome the introduced weight and rotating about its natural lightship axis.
In choosing the TUBE in this experiment to set a base line for comparison there was no artificially introduced
properties of form to contend with or back calculate out, only the introduced weigh of the incline weight and the
actions caused thereby.
10 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

I
NCLI
NEOFBa
ke
r
sPa
n
Pi
c
t
ur
eo
fBAKER
S PAN & Setup;
Added weights
Incline weight
Plastic Deck
Incline weight
Loadcell attachment
point
Dr
a
wi
ngo
fBa
ke
r
sPa
n;
R0-11/16"
BO R0-11/16"
1/16" 8-3/16"
12-3/4"
11-7/8" 92"
TOP
8-5/8"
0.70
8-5/8"
0.95
8-5/8" 1
.18
TOP
8-5/8"
2"
1 .41
VESSEL: Baker's Secret
11 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Bake
r
sPans
e
t
up;
The pan was made to the specifications as per the drawing above and chosen because of its shape, the shape adds
no resistance to rotation about the axis. The four 8 oz weights were added to the pan to give it a VCG for the
purpose of inclining. The plastic deck was added to give a level surface on which to move the incline weight.
The opening in the deck was created so as the Electronic Clinometer could be installed. The location of the
centerline of the Electronic Clinometer was mounted as close as possible to the physical centerline of the pan.
The pan was then weigh by scale for a true weight and a set point for comparison by volume calculations.
The pan was then set into the tank for volume measurement and to run the incline test by using the weight
method.Thewe
i
g
ht
sus
e
di
s#4a
t1.
34oza
nd#2a
t1.
28oz
,i
twa
smove
dout
boa
r
df
r
om c
e
nt
e
r
l
i
nea
t1
intervals for a total of six movements. All data was recorded and shown below.
The right section of the drawing shows the water plane throughout the movements. This was generated to show
that with rotation about the axis, the water plane did not change at each heeling movement.
VESSEL:
Baker's Secret
Input Cell
Test tank area =
741.125 sq.in.
Water condition
1 Inch to FT.
scale wt = 68.7
0.576969 Oz
0.0833
Oz
Input Cell Wt of Water per cu.in =
SG =
1
Item Wt .= 68.7
water dens:
62.42
Oz
Size = 11.875" loa x 9.125" beam x 2" Molded depth
CID = Cu. In. Disp.
CALCULATIONS by Calculated Displacement
CID =124.8128613
Wt. Oz =72.01315174
Wt Lb = 4 . 5 0 0 8 2 2
CALCULATIONS
Movement
Deg. Heel surface ch.
CID
Wt. Ch oz
% of total
wt ch lb
cu. Ft.
Wt. Oz
Lb.
moment
1~ 4
0.23
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
0
1.34
0.08375 0.006976375
2~ 2
0.46
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
0
1.28
0.08000 0.013640375
3~ 4
0.70
-0.00177
-1.311791 -0.756862886
-0.011017 -0.04730393
-0.000759138
1.34
0.08375 0.02061675
4~ 2
0.95
-0.00188
-1.393315 -0.803899562
-0.011702 -0.050243723
-0.000806317
1.28
0.08000 0.02731675
5~ 4
1.18
-0.00185
-1.371081 -0.791071378
-0.011515 -0.049441961
-0.00079345
1.34
0.08375 0.034293125
6~ 2
1.41
-0.00187
-1.385904 -0.799623501
-0.011639 -0.049976469
-0.000802028
1.28
0.08000 0.040957125
1" moves
Wt. # 4
1.34
in Oz.
Wt # 21.28
in Oz.
Moment = Ft. x LB
Shown above are the six movements of the pan using two weights to produce the moments and degree of heel.
12 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Start surface
Movement
1
2
3
4
5
6
0.16572
CID =
Deg. Heel
0.22
0.46
0.70
0.95
1.17
1.42
122.819235 Wt. Oz =
70.8628912
surface ch.
0.00007
0.00192
0.00191
0.00185
0.00186
0.00284
CID
Wt. Ch oz
% of total
0.051879 0.029932431
0.000436
1.422960 0.821003808
0.011951
1.415549 0.816727747
0.011888
1.371081 0.791071378
0.011515
1.378493 0.795347439
0.011577
2.104795 1.214401466
0.017677
Wt Lb =
wt ch lb
0.001870777
0.051312738
0.051045484
0.049441961
0.049709215
0.075900092
4.4289307
INCHES
4.625
reading oz
cu. Ft.
3.00224E-05
0.23
0.000823472
0.52
0.000819183
0.80
0.00079345
1.12
0.000797739
1.41
0.001218053
1.71
distance
FEET
0.385416667
lb
moment
0.0144 0.005540365
0.0325 0.012526042
0.0500 0.019270833
0.0700 0.026979167
0.0881 0.033964844
0.1069 0.041191406
Shown above are the six movements of the pan using the Loadcell to produce the moments and degree of heel.
HEEL DEGREES:
The heeling degrees was kept as close as possible to allow for interpolations. The columns of data in the title
c
e
l
la
r
ena
me
d
Wt
mf
orwe
i
g
htme
t
hoda
nd
Lc
mf
orl
oa
dc
e
l
lme
t
hod.
Movement &
weight #
Wtm Deg.
Heel
Lcm Deg.
Heel
1~4
0.23
0.22
2~2
0.46
0.46
3~4
0.70
0.70
4~2
0.95
0.95
5~4
1.18
1.17
6~2
1.41
1.42
As shown the degree of heel difference was kept to a minimum, with

M2, M3 & M4 matching.
SURFACE CHANGE:
13 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Movement &
Degree
Wtm surface ch. Lcm surface ch.
1: 0.23 0.22
0.00000
0.00007
2: 0.46 0.46
0.00000
0.00192
3: 0.70 0.70
-0.00177
0.00191
4: 0.95 0.95
-0.00188
0.00185
5: 1.18 1.17
-0.00185
0.00186
6: 1.411.42
-0.00187
0.00284
Note the surface change for the Weight Method; the first two
movements had a no gain or loss in surface. The remaining four
movements there was a gain in the height of the surface this
would be a gain in volume displacement.
The surface change for the Loadcell Method stayed with a
constant loss of surface height, then a constant loss of volume
displacement.

Movement &
Degree
Movement &
weight #
Wtm CID
Lcm CID
1: 0.23 0.22
1~ 4
0.000000
0.051879
2: 0.46 0.46
2~ 2
0.000000
1.422960
3: 0.70 0.70
3~ 4
-1.311791
1.415549
4: 0.95 0.95
4~ 2
-1.393315
1.371081
5: 1.18 1.17
5~ 4
-1.371081
1.378493
6: 1.41 1.42
6~ 2
-1.385904
2.104795
In the Wtm column you will note that the cubic

inch displacement was neutral for the first 2
movements then a gain occurred for movements 3
to 6.
The Lcm column shows a loss in volume
displacement, which is constant with the
changing TCB, TCF as inclined in the lightship
condition.

Movement
Wtm WPA
Lcm WPA
1: 0.23 0.22
0.7439
0.7430
2: 0.46 0.46
0.7440
0.7431
3: 0.70 0.70
0.7441
0.7433
4: 0.95 0.95
0.7443
0.7434
5: 1.18 1.17
0.7444
0.7435
6: 1.41 1.42
0.7446
0.7437
Note in both methods that the changes in waterline area are both
constant and linear.
14 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Movement&
Degree
Wtm VCG'
1: 0.23 0.22
2: 0.46 0.46
3: 0.70 0.70
4: 0.95 0.95
5:
1.18 1.17
6:
1.41 1.42
0.1200
0.1250
0.1260
0.1350
0.1310
0.1320
WtmLt.Ship
VCG'
0.1235
0.1287
0.1297
0.1391
0.1349
0.1359
Lcm VCG'
Wtm TCB'
Wtm
Lt.Ship
TCB'
0.1800
0.1560
0.1520
0.1400
0.1320
0.1320
0.0018
0.0036
0.0055
0.0075
0.0093
0.0112
0.0019
0.0037
0.0057
0.0077
0.0095
0.0114
Lcm TCB' Wtm TCF'
0.0017
0.0037
0.0056
0.0075
0.0093
0.0113
0.0003
0.0007
0.0011
0.0014
0.0018
0.0021
Wtm
Lt.Ship
TCF'
0.0003
0.0007
0.0011
0.0014
0.0018
0.0021
Lcm TCF' Wtm TKM'
0.0003
0.0007
0.0011
0.0014
0.0018
0.0022
0.5010
0.5011
0.5012
0.5014
0.5016
0.5018
Wtm
Lt.Ship
TKM'
Lcm TKM'
0.5128
0.5129
0.5130
0.5131
0.5133
0.5135
0.5060
0.5062
0.5063
0.5064
0.5066
0.5068

Deg. Heel
1: 0.23 0.22
2: 0.46 0.46
3: 0.70 0.70
4: 0.95 0.95
5:
6:
1.18 1.17
1.41 1.42
Wtm VCB' Lcm VCB' Wtm VCF' Lcm VCF' Wtm Draft' Lcm Draft Wtm Vol. Ft^3 Lcm Vol. Ft^3
0.0519
0.0511
0.1022
0.1006
0.1022
0.1006
0.0721
0.0710
0.0519
0.0511
0.1022
0.1006
0.1022
0.1006
0.0721
0.0710
0.0519
0.0511
0.1022
0.1006
0.1022
0.1006
0.0721
0.0710
0.0519
0.0511
0.1022
0.1006
0.1022
0.1006
0.0721
0.0710
0.0519
0.0511
0.1022
0.1007
0.1022
0.1006
0.0721
0.0710
0.0520
0.0512
0.1022
0.1007
0.1022
0.1006
0.0721
0.0710
Thea
bovec
ha
r
ti
sac
ompa
r
i
s
onbe
t
we
e
nt
heWe
i
g
htMe
t
hod
ASI
NCLI
NEDa
ndt
heLoa
dc
e
l
lMe
t
hod.
Thec
ha
r
ts
howst
ha
twhe
nt
hec
a
l
c
ul
a
t
i
onsf
ort
heva
r
i
ouspr
ope
r
t
i
e
soft
heBa
ke
r
s Pan were made that there is

slight difference in the TCB, no difference TCF and a difference TKM result of each method. There is a
difference between the two methods & lightship calculations in the VCG. The VCG of the Weight Movement is
lower due to the weight of incline weights used to incline the Pan giving a larger volume of displacement and
water plane area then the loadcell method at lightship, this weight was backed off in the lightship calculations but
it has already corrupted the data by artificially changing the properties of the volume displacement verses the
axis of rotation.
I
ts
houl
da
l
s
obenot
e
dt
ha
tus
i
ngt
heLoa
dc
e
l
lme
t
hodt
oi
nc
l
i
ne
,t
heBa
ke
r
sPa
nwa
si
nc
l
i
ne
di
ni
t
sTRUE
lightship configuration thus allowing for the t
r
u
emo
v
e
me
n
to
ft
h
eBa
k
e
r
sPa
nwi
t
h
o
u
ta
n
yf
a
l
s
e
l
yi
mp
o
s
e
d
properties of rotation to be introduced.
Calculation of the average VCG for the three findings are;
1281
or
Weight Method Lt. Ship:
0.
1319
or
Loadcell Method:
0.
1486
or
1
.
5
3
7
2
1
.
5
8
2
8
1
.
7
8
4
0
Note that the VCG of the Loadcell Method is higher than both the Weight Method Incline and the calculated
lightship results of that incline. In the TUBE experiment the results were opposite with the Weight Method
having a higher VCG than the Loadcell Method.
15 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

I
np
r
o
v
i
n
go
u
twh
i
c
hVCGwa
sc
o
r
r
e
c
tt
h
ef
o
l
l
o
wi
n
gp
i
c
t
u
r
e
de
xp
e
r
i
me
n
twa
sc
o
n
d
u
c
t
e
do
nt
h
eBa
k
e
r
sPa
n
.
Thepa
nwa
si
ns
t
a
l
l
e
dwi
t
has
e
tof
pi
vot
s
a
te
a
c
he
ndofi
t
sl
ong
i
t
udi
na
lc
e
nt
e
r
l
i
ne
.Thepi
vots
c
r
e
wswe
r
e
honed to a point at their end for a balance point. The screws were then threaded in to the height of the
c
or
r
e
s
pondi
ngVCG
soft
heLi
g
ht
s
hi
pa
ndLo
a
dc
e
l
lr
e
s
ul
t
s
.
Bake
r
sPanwi
t
hpi
votpoi
nts
e
tt
o1.
582VCGaspe
rWe
i
ghtr
e
s
ul
t
s
Note that the pan is balancing at an angle thus showing that the VCG is set lower then the actual VCG of the
pan. When rocked the pan would almost immediately return to this position.
Bake
r
sPanwi
t
hpi
votpoi
nts
e
tt
o1.
784aspe
rLoadc
e
l
lr
e
s
ul
t
s
.
Note that the pan is balancing at level thus showing that the VCG is set at the actual VCG of the pan. It should
be also noted that when the pan was rocked it took quite some time for it to settle out with always returning to
the same level plane.
16 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

INCLINE OF Liftboat Replica Model
The liftboat model pictured and used in this experiment was made for a court case, the model is to the
dimensions and weigh of the original vessels as built when in question, and exhibits the same properties
as said vessels at that time, they are in service today in their modified condition.
Picture of Liftboat & Setup;
Added weights for

Trim
Incline weights
Incline Test weights movement mat.

Loadcell attachment
point
Drawing of Liftboat;
The liftboat was made to the specifications as per the original vessel drawings and incline reports to scale. A
c
opyo
ft
he
Mode
lBui
l
de
r
sRe
por
t
i
sonf
i
l
ea
nda
va
i
l
a
bl
e
.Themode
l
sdi
me
ns
i
ons are as follows.
LOA:20
Be
a
m M/
S:14.
45
Mol
de
dDe
pt
h:2.
21
Le
gl
e
ng
t
h:43.
77
Weight as certified of hull & super structure: 5.4545 Lb. Weight of total model as shown: 13.8666 Lb
Liftboat setup;
The liftboat was set into the tank for volume measurement and to run the incline test by using the weight
method. The weights used for the incline are the duplicates to model scale weights as used in the original
vessels incline with the same movements re-enacted. A deck load had to be added to correct Trim and to avoid
the possibility of breaking water plane. All data was recorded and shown below.
17 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

VESSEL:
Liftboat w/legs,pads, consum Input Cell
Test tank area =
741.125 sq.in.
Water condition
1 Inch to FT.
0.0833
scale wt = 212.943
Oz
Input Cell
Wt of Water per cu.in =
0.576969 Oz
SG =
1
w/ deck wt of 18.8 oz water dens:
Item Wt .= 221.863
Oz
62.42
Size = 20" loa x 14.45" beam x 2.21" Molded depth
CID = Cu. In. Disp.
CALCULATIONS by Calculated Displacement Wt. Ch. = weight of water
CID =401.1487288
Wt. Oz =231.4503809
Wt Lb = 1 4 . 4 6 5 6 4 9
CALCULATIONS
Movement
Deg. Heel
surface ch.
CID
Wt. Ch oz
% of total
wt ch lb
cu. Ft.
Wt. Oz
Lb.
moment
1~ 2& 3
0.62
-0.00319
-2.364189 -1.364063619
-0.006148 -0.085253976
-0.001368165
2.58
0.16100
0.0805
2~ 1& 4
1.12
-0.00220
-1.630475
-0.94073353
-0.004240 -0.058795846
-0.000943562
2.56
0.16006
0.1499021
3~ 7a & 8
1.52
-0.00179
-1.326614 -0.765415009
-0.003450 -0.047838438
-0.000767716
2.19
0.13694
0.20303773
4~ 7& 5
1.76
-0.00333
-2.467946
-1.42392848
-0.006418
-0.08899553
-0.00142821
1.59
0.09966 0.234958872
5~ 0
0.00
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
0
0.00000 0.234958872
6~ 0
0.00
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
0
0.00000 0.234958872
as p er sheet Wt. # 2& 3 2.58
Wt # 4& 12.56
Wt. # 7a & 8 2.191
Wt. # 7& 5
1.5945
RESULTS ofINCLINE
As Inclined TEST 1
Corrected ; Incline Wts removed TEST 2
Deg. Heel
VCG'
TCB'
TCF'
TKM'
VCG'
TCB'
TCF'
TKM'
1.5070
0.0098
0.0000
0.9924
0.62
1.5570
0.0101
0.0028
1.0168
1.5216
0.0177
0.0018
0.9868
1.12
1.5701
0.0183
0.0040
1.0141
1.5188
0.0239
0.0030
0.9839
1.52
1.5675
0.0247
0.0045
1.0138
1.5176
0.0277
0.0035
0.9831
1.76
1.5666
0.0286
0.0047
1.0139
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
1.0108AVG
INCHES =12.1300
1.0435AVG
INCHES =12.5224
Shown above are the four movements of the liftboat using eight weights to produce the moments and degree of
he
e
l
.Youwi
l
lnot
ei
nt
he
s
ur
f
a
c
ec
h.
Col
umni
nmove
me
nt
s#1t
o4t
he
r
ei
sa
ni
nc
r
e
a
s
ei
nt
hewa
t
e
rl
i
ne
,
whi
c
ht
r
a
ns
l
a
t
e
si
nt
oa
ni
nc
r
e
a
s
ei
ndi
s
pl
a
c
e
me
ntvol
ume
,orde
e
pe
rdr
a
f
t
.The
CI
Dc
ol
umnis showing the
calculated volume of increase of the vessel as calculated by the surface area of the tank verses the amount of the
s
ur
f
a
c
ec
ha
ng
e
.The
ASI
nc
l
i
neTEST1r
e
s
ul
t
sa
r
ea
sc
a
l
c
ul
a
t
e
dbyourhy
dr
os
t
a
t
i
c
spr
og
r
a
ma
nda
r
es
howni
n
feet. The average VCG is shown in feet and converted into inches at right to give some assimilation to the vessel.
The
Cor
r
e
c
t
e
dc
a
l
c
ul
a
t
i
onswe
r
edonef
ort
hi
si
nc
l
i
ne
,duet
ohul
lf
or
ma
ndt
opr
oduc
ec
ompa
r
i
s
o
nda
t
a
,t
he
Corrected data shows the vessel in the fully loaded condition with the incline weights removed. In doing the
Tr
a
di
t
i
ona
l
l
ya
c
c
e
pt
e
dCa
l
c
ul
a
t
i
ons
f
orl
i
g
ht
s
hi
pi
ts
houl
dbenot
e
dt
ha
tnoc
ompe
ns
a
t
i
oni
sma
def
orwha
t
woul
dbea
r
e
duc
e
dmome
nt
oft
hehe
e
li
ft
heve
s
s
e
lwa
she
e
l
e
dwi
t
houtt
hewe
i
g
ht
s
.Thi
s
ba
c
ki
ngof
f
oft
he
i
nc
l
i
n
ewe
i
g
ht
ss
houl
da
l
s
oi
nc
l
udet
he
ba
c
ki
ngof
f
oft
hemome
ntt
ha
ti
tt
ookt
opr
oduc
es
a
i
da
ng
l
e
.Thi
si
snot
done thus a FALSE assumption is made for the moment and thus a FALSE VCG at lightship is calculated and
assumed.
18 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Start surface
0.52326
CID =
387.8010675 Wt. Oz =
223.7491941 Wt Lb =
Movement
Deg. Heel
surface ch.
CID
Wt. Ch oz
% of total
wt ch lb
1
0.62
0.00512
3.794560
2.189343489
0.009868
0.136833968
2
1.12
0.00656
4.861780
2.805096345
0.012643
0.175318522
3
1.52
0.00669
4.958126
2.860685144
0.012894
0.178792822
4
1.76
0.00784
5.810420
3.352432217
0.015110
0.209527014
5
0.00
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
6
0.00
0.00000
0.000000
0
0.000000
0
RESULTS of INCLINE
As Inclined TEST 3
VCG'
TCB'
TCF'
TKM'
Deg. Heel
1.5325
0.0101
0.0023
1.0135
0.62
1.5553
0.0182
0.0038
1.0099
1.12
1.5498
0.0246
0.0044
1.0094
1.52
1.5439
0.0285
0.0046
1.0095
1.76
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0
1.0303AVG
INCHES = 12.363
13.98432463
INCHES
7.25
reading oz
cu. Ft.
0.002195926
2.06
0.00281353
3.91
0.002869286
5.27
0.003362512
6.04
0
0.00
0
0.00
FEET
distance
0.604166667
lb
moment
0.1288 0.077786458
0.2444 0.147643229
0.3294 0.198997396
0.3775 0.228072917
0.0000
0
0.0000
0
No
t
et
h
e
r
ea
r
en
o
Co
r
r
e
c
t
e
dLi
g
h
t
s
h
i
p
c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
ss
i
n
c
et
h
el
i
f
t
b
o
a
twa
si
n
c
l
i
n
e
di
nFu
l
ll
o
a
dc
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
nu
s
i
n
gthe
Loadcell Method with the incline weights removed.
HEEL DEGREES:
The heeling degrees were kept as close as possible to allow for interpolations. The columns of data in the title
c
e
l
la
r
ena
me
d
Wt
mf
orwe
i
g
htme
t
hoda
nd
Lc
mf
orl
oa
dc
e
l
lme
t
hod.
Movement &
WTS
Wtm Deg.
Heel
Lcm Deg.
Heel
1~ 2& 3
0.62
0.62
2~ 1& 4
1.12
1.12
3~ 7a & 8
1.52
1.52
4~ 7&5
1.76
1.76
As shown the degree of heel was matched in every movement.
SURFACE CHANGE:
19 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Movement &
Degrees
1: 0.62 0.62
Wtm surface ch. Lcm surface ch.

-0.00319
0.00512
2: 1.12 1.12
-0.00220
0.00656
3: 1.52 1.52
-0.00179
0.00669
4: 1.76 1.76
-0.00333
0.00784
Note the surface change for the Weight Method; all four
movements had a gain in surface height this would be a gain in
volume displacement.
The surface change for the Loadcell Method stayed with a
constant loss of surface height, then a constant loss of volume
displacement.

Movement &
Degrees
Wtm CID
Lcm CID
1: 0.62 0.62
-2.364189
3.794560
2: 1.12 1.12
-1.630475
4.861780
3: 1.52 1.52
-1.326614
4.958126
4: 1.76 1.76
-2.467946
5.810420
In the Wtm column you will note that the cubic inch
displacement gain occurred for all movements.
The Lcm column shows a loss in volume displacement, which is
constant with the changing TCB, TCF as inclined in the
lightship or full load condition.

Movement &
Degrees
Wtm WPA
Wtm F/load
WPA
Lcm WPA
1: 0.62 0.62
1.9197
1.9059
1.9086
2: 1.12 1.12
1.9120
1.8978
1.8997
3: 1.52 1.52
1.9056
1.8941
1.8957
4: 1.76 1.76
1.9029
1.8925
1.8939
Note in both methods and back calculation, that the

changes in waterline area are both constant and liner.

Movement &
Degrees
Wtm VCB'
Wtm
F/load
VCB'
1: 0.62 0.62
0.0871
0.0845
0.0848
0.1536
0.1489
0.1496
0.1536
0.1489
0.1496
0.2317
0.2228
0.2240
2: 1.12 1.12
0.0872
0.0846
0.0850
0.1536
0.1490
0.1496
0.1536
0.1489
0.1496
0.2317
0.2228
0.2240
3: 1.52 1.52
0.0873
0.0847
0.0851
0.1536
0.1490
0.1496
0.1536
0.1489
0.1496
0.2317
0.2228
0.2240
4: 1.76 1.76
0.0874
0.0849
0.0852
0.1536
0.1490
0.1496
0.1536
0.1489
0.1496
0.2317
0.2228
0.2240
Lcm VCB' Wtm VCF'
Wtm
F/load
VCF'
Lcm VCF' Wtm Draft'
20 of 26
Wtm
F/load
Draft'
Wtm
Wtm Vol. F/load Vol. Lcm Vol.
Lcm Draft'
Ft^3
Ft^3
Ft^3
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

The chart bellow is a comparison of the calculations of both methods including corrected for Wtm.
Movement &
Degrees
Wtm
VCG'
Wtm
corrected
VCG'
Lcm
VCG'
Wtm
Wtm corrected Lcm
TCB'
TCB'
TCB'
Wtm
Wtm corrected Lcm
TCF'
TCF'
TCF'
Wtm
Wtm corrected Lcm
TKM' TKM' TKM'
1: 0.62 0.62 1.5070
1.5570
1.5325 0.0098
0.0101
0.0101 0.0000
0.0028
0.0023 0.9924
1.0168
1.0135
2: 1.12 1.12 1.5216
1.5701
1.5553 0.0177
0.0183
0.0182 0.0018
0.0040
0.0038 0.9868
1.0141
1.0099
3: 1.52 1.52 1.5188
1.5675
1.5498 0.0239
0.0247
0.0246 0.0030
0.0045
0.0044 0.9839
1.0138
1.0094
4: 1.76 1.76 1.5176
1.5666
1.5439 0.0277
0.0286
0.0285 0.0035
0.0047
0.0046 0.9831
1.0139
1.0095
The chart shows that when the calculations for the various properties of the Liftboat were made that there is
difference in the TCB, TCF and TKM result of each method. There is a slight difference between the loadcell
method and the corrected calculations in the results. The VCG of the Weight Movement is lower due to the
weight of incline weights used to incline the Liftboat giving a larger volume of displacement and water plane
area than the loadcell method at this condition, this weight was backed off in the corrected calculations but it
has already corrupted the data by artificially changing the properties of the volume displacement verses the axis of
rotation.
I
ts
houl
da
l
s
obenot
e
dt
ha
tus
i
ngt
heLoa
dc
e
l
lme
t
hodt
oi
nc
l
i
ne
,t
heBa
ke
r
sPa
nwa
si
nc
l
i
ne
di
ni
t
sTRUE
l
i
g
h
t
s
h
i
pc
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
nt
h
u
sa
l
l
o
wi
n
gf
o
rt
h
et
r
u
emo
v
e
me
n
to
ft
h
eBa
k
e
r
sPa
nwi
t
h
o
u
ta
n
yf
a
l
s
e
l
yi
mp
o
s
e
d
properties of rotation to be introduced.
5163
or
Weight Method corrected:
1.
5653
or
Loadcell Method:
1.
5454
or
1
8
.
1
9
5
6
1
8
.
7
8
3
6
1
8
.
5
4
4
8
Note that the VCG of the Loadcell Method is higher than the Weight Method Incline, the calculated corrected
results are higher than the Loadcell Method. In the TUBE experiment the results were opposite with the Weight
Method having a higher VCG than the Loadcell Method.
There was another incline experiment preformed on the model using both methods and calculated as if it was
preformed on the original vessel using the real world weight of the vessel, incline weights, consumables and
deck load. The results obtained from that test are as follows:
21 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Incline using weights
VESSEL CALCULATIONS Review as per USCG form CG-993-8
Vessel at time of Stability Test - Condition0 as Calculated
Corrected Displacement
898.72L tons
Mean virtual metacentric height obtained from plot of

inclining moments verses tangents of angles of heel
30.29Feet
Midship = 44.70835Ft.
From Mean of Incline sheet
Corrected SG as Inclined
0Feet
Density
lb/ft^3 =
Correction for Free Surface
Mean Metacentric Height

GM
= 3(bow,
0 . 2 main
9 F edeck
et
From Hydrostatics Page from X=0 station
M oment to Trim
LCB =
48.312
LKM Ft .=
0
LCF =
49.17
LGM Ft .=
0
VCB =
0
TKM Ft .= 60.77
TCG =
0
TGM Ft. =
0
LWL =
0
V.C.G.
BWL =
0
LCB = -3.60365 Neg. = AFT
L C F = - Neg. = AFT
See Hydrostatics Pages
aft of "0"
0.97832
61.0667344
to stem intersection):
0
Ft. ton
MT 1 Ft. =
0
calculated
Trim Ft. =
0.00
T Lever =
0
^ base line
30.48 calculated
L.C.G. =
-3.60
Neg. = AFT of Midship
1 Inch
8, 8a, for all other data
Vessel Lightship - Condition 1 as Calculated

Displ. V. C. G. Above Base
L. C. G. From Midship
ITEMS
&
Vertical
AFT
FWD
List of Major Equip. etc.
Lever
Feet AFT
Feet FWD
Weight
Moment
Moment
Moment
included in condition
Ship Condition "0"
898.72 30.478184 27391.353 3.60365
3238.67233
See Above
Weights to ADD
0#DIV/0!
0#DIV/0!
0 #DIV/0!
0page 15 Stow & Equip. list
Weights to Subtract
167.0815 5.6269333 940.15643 9.83
139.150452
22.79
4566.6791page 15 Stow & Equip. list
Weights to Subtract
78.18 4.9297928 385.4112 #DIV/0!
0
11.25
879.525page 13 Tankage
Weights to Subtract
38.419643 11.237465 431.73938 2.96
16.3414286
19.25
557.36134page 18 Test Weights
Weights to Subtract
0#DIV/0!
0#DIV/0!
0 #DIV/0!
0page 18 Trim Weights
Weights to Relocate
712.24607
0
0page 12 Relocate list
Ship Condition "I"
615.03886 42.836793 26346.292 5.0129848 3083.18045 9.76127815 6003.5654
Calculated LCG = 4.74829338 2920.38496Total Moment
Hydrostatics LCG =
0fr
hydrostatics page 9a at Trim = 0
Molded draft at LCF at Lightship Displacement in Salt Water
644.385102Lton
@1.025
22 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Incline using Loadcell:
VESSEL
Review as per USCG form CG-993-8
CALCULATIONS
Vessel at time of Stability Test - Condition 0 as Calculated
860.3L tons
Corrected Displacement
Mean virtual metacentric height obtained from plot of 32.41Feet

inclining moments verses tangents of angles of heel
Corrected SG as Inclined
Correction for Free Surface
0 Feet
Midship =
44.70835Ft. aft of "0"
From Mean of Incline sheet
Density
lb/ft^3 =
0.97832
61.0667344
GM = 3 2 . 4 1 Feet
Mean Metacentric Height
From Hydrostatics Page from X=0 station (bow, main deck to stem intersection):
LCB = 48.312
LKM Ft .=
0
Moment to Trim 1 Inch
0
Ft. ton
LCF =
49.17
LGM Ft .=
0
MT 1 Ft. =
0
calculated
VCB =
0
TKM Ft .= 63.15
Trim Ft. =
0.00
TCG =
0
TGM Ft. =
0
T Lever =
0
LWL =
0
V.C.G. ^ base line
30.74 calculated
BWL =
0
L.C.G. =
-3.60
Neg. = AFT of Midship
LCB = -3.60365 Neg. = AFT
LCF =See Hydrostatics Pages 8, 8a, for all other data
4 . 4 6 1 6 5 Neg. = AFT
Vessel Lightship - Condition 1 as Calculated

Displ.
&
V. C. G. Above Base
L. C. G. From Midship
ITEMS
Vertical
AFT
FWD
List of Major Equip. etc.
Lever
Feet AFT
Feet FWD
Weight
Moment
Moment
Moment
included in condition
Ship Condition "0"
860.3 30.744687 26449.654
3.60365 3100.2201
See Above
Weights to ADD
0#DIV/0!
0#DIV/0!
0
#DIV/0!
0page 15 Stow & Equip. list
Weights to Subtract
167.0815 5.6269333 940.15643
9.83
139.150452
22.79
4566.6791page 15 Stow & Equip. list
Weights to Subtract
78.18 4.9297928 385.4112 #DIV/0!
0
11.25
879.525page 13 Tankage
Weights to Subtract
0#DIV/0!
0
2.96
0
19.25
0page 18 Test Weights
Weights to Subtract
0#DIV/0!
0#DIV/0!
0
#DIV/0!
0page 18 Trim Weights
Weights to Relocate
712.24607
0
0page 12 Relocate list
Ship Condition "I"
615.0385 42.007667 25836.333 4.814446 2961.06964 8.85506196 5446.2041
Calculated LCG =
4.040616 2485.13442Total Moment
Hydrostatics LCG =
0
from hydrostatics page 9a at Trim = 0
Molded draft at LCF at Lightship Displacement in Salt
@1.025 644.384728Lton
Water
The above results of the two different methods of heeling the vessel demonstrate in real world weights and
measurements what the differences between the two methods produce.
The
AsI
nc
l
i
ne
dr
e
s
ul
t
ss
howt
heWe
i
g
htMe
t
hodt
opr
oduc
eaVCGof30.
48a
ndt
he Loadcell Method
pr
oduc
e
sa30.
74VCG,s
l
i
g
ht
l
ymor
ec
ons
e
r
va
t
i
ve
.Onc
ea
l
lt
hewe
i
g
htofc
ons
uma
bl
e
s
,t
e
s
twe
i
g
ht
sa
ndde
c
k
we
i
g
h
twe
r
er
e
move
da
nda
c
c
ount
e
df
orbyc
a
l
c
ul
a
t
i
oni
nt
he
Condi
t
i
on1s
e
c
t
i
ont
heWe
i
g
htMe
t
hod
produced a lightship VCG of 42.
84a
ndt
heLo
a
dc
e
l
lMe
t
hodpr
oduc
e
dal
i
g
ht
s
hi
pVCGof42.
00
.Ther
e
s
ul
t
s
of VCG of the above testing are comparable to the results obtained on the last incline of the original vessel
under USCG witness.
23 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

ARGUMENT;
We
i
g
htI
nc
l
i
ner
ot
a
t
e
st
heve
s
s
e
loni
t
sa
xi
swi
t
houtc
ha
ng
i
ngi
t
swa
t
e
rpl
a
nepr
ope
r
t
i
e
s
:FALSE
Loa
dc
e
l
lI
nc
l
i
nei
sl
i
f
t
i
ngt
heve
s
s
e
la
ndc
ha
ng
i
ngt
hewa
t
e
rpl
a
nepr
ope
r
t
i
e
s
:
TheLoa
dc
e
l
lme
t
hodr
a
i
s
e
st
heTKM g
i
vi
ngaf
a
l
s
eVCG.
FALSE
FALSE
SUMMATION;
The weight incline changes the properties of a vessel by introducing a weight to leverage action that acts against the
axis of the vessel both in the negative and positive for volume displacement as well as the leverage point. It
cannot be predicted as to which effect it has on a hull form without timely and costly measurements and
calculations. The weight method does both aspects of an argument, it increases the volume displacement or
pushes the hull down and it also decreases the volume displacement or lifts the hull up. Both events can happen
in a single incline of a vessel and without vigilance and correct measurements at each movement it can give an
incorrect VCG.
The weight incline on a perfect cylindrical hull form has been shown to increase volume displacement at low
degrees of angles while decreasing volume displacement on higher angles of heeling within the same incline. It has
also shown on a different hull type, a barge style hull with sides shaped as to not change water plans cross
section, it goes from no change at lower angles to increase volume displacement at the higher angles. This same
hul
lwa
sputt
oa
ba
l
a
nc
et
e
s
t
t
oc
onf
i
r
mt
her
e
s
ul
t
soft
heVCG,i
twa
sf
oundt
ha
tt
hei
nc
l
i
ner
e
s
u
l
t
i
ngVCG
was low and incorrect.
Thi
se
f
f
e
c
tc
oul
dbede
s
c
r
i
be
da
st
he
vol
umebuoy
a
nc
yt
oa
xi
sr
a
t
i
obe
l
owt
hea
xi
sofr
ot
a
t
i
onoft
hef
or
m.
When increased volume displacement occurs it is the reaction of the hull form not being able to support the
leverage applied by the rotation about the axis at that point. The reverse happens when there is a decrease in
volume displacement, the distance between the axis and vertical bottom of the hull form is increased thus the
larger leverage arm occurs. This then causes the TCG of the axis to rotate about the hull forms volume instead of
rotating about the axis. This is the most favorable method since the VCG of the hull form is changing
uniformly with the change in the volume to axis ratio.
TKM is directly related to the draft/displacement of the vessel. The lightship TKM is the initial TKM used by the
loadcell method of incline. The TKM of the vessel, when inclined with the weight method, is lowered by the
introduction of the weights. If the TKM were being raised by the loadcell method then the resulting VCG
would be excessively higher than the VCG arrived at by the weight method in all conditions and hull forms,
assuming that the TGM remains constant.
Although, when using the Incline Weights, there are certain effects to point out about the effects of the weights
on the results of the incline. First the weights are artificially changing the true VCG of the vessel by introducing
their own VCG to the vessel. This would have to be back calculated out for every movement by reducing the
moment by the weights moment verses weights VCG verses weights TCG. The simple calculation of removing
the weigh of the weights and using the same moment obtained with the weights on (calculation used now) does
not show the true VCG of the vessel, the moment shows the VCG of the vessel with the weights on and only that
mome
nt
.Al
t
houg
hy
ouha
ves
e
e
mi
ng
l
ybr
oug
htt
heve
s
s
e
lba
c
kt
ot
hepe
r
c
e
i
ve
l
i
g
ht
s
hi
pc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
24 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

by back calculating the weigh reduction you have not back calculated the moment, thus the resulting VCG is
incorrect due to the fact that you are showing a higher moment to true hull form then it would have taken if the
weights were not on the vessel. This false moment is showing a VCG other than what the vessel actually has.
You will note below that in the first experiment using the TUBE the VCG of the Weight Method as inclined is
higher then the Loadcell Method.
Calculation of the average VCG for the two findings are;
1853
or
Loadcell Method:
0.
1773
or
2
.
2
2
4
5
2
.
1
2
8
5
I
nt
h
es
e
c
o
n
de
xp
e
r
i
me
n
to
ft
h
eBa
k
e
r
sPa
n
,
t
h
eVCG
so
b
t
a
i
n
e
ds
h
o
wt
h
e
a
si
n
c
l
i
n
e
d
VCGt
ob
el
o
we
rt
h
a
n
t
he
c
a
l
c
ul
a
t
e
dl
i
g
h
t
s
hi
pVCG, this calculation was obtained by the traditional method of backing off the
weight values without correcting the weight moment values.
Note that by lowering the water plane and increasing the hull volume, the VCG obtained by the weight
movement was ba
s
e
do
nag
r
e
a
t
e
r
v
o
l
u
met
oa
x
i
sr
a
t
i
o
t
h
a
nt
h
eLo
a
d
c
e
l
lMe
t
h
o
d
,
wh
i
c
hr
o
t
a
t
e
dt
h
eh
u
l
lf
o
r
m
about its axis in the lightship condition. This incline did not have any other influences on the results such as
weight above the deck with a high VCG contributing to the takeover of the hull forms VCG. As shown above
(
pa
g
e16)t
het
r
ueVCGwa
snotc
onc
l
ude
di
ne
i
t
he
rt
he
a
si
nc
l
i
ne
dor
c
a
l
c
ul
a
t
e
dl
i
g
ht
s
hi
pVCGoft
he
vessel since the true moment was not obtained to rotate the hull form about its axis.
1281
or
Weight Method Lt. Ship:
0.
1319
or
Loadcell Method:
0.
1486
or
1
.
5
3
7
2
1
.
5
8
2
8
1
.
7
8
4
0
In the third experiment of a typical hull form of a liftboat the results were altered by a high VCG of the legs and
ot
he
rs
t
r
uc
t
ur
e
s
.Wh
e
nobt
a
i
ni
ngt
he
a
si
nc
l
i
ne
dVCGt
heve
s
s
e
l
shul
lf
or
mha
dag
r
e
a
t
e
rVol
umedi
s
pl
a
c
e
me
nt
thus greater resistance to heel than would be in a lighter condition along with the falsely imposed incline weights
moment. When back calculating the findings to get the lightship values, again the false moment carried into the
calculation compounding the other interactions of the legs and superstructure to give an incorrect VCG. The
Loadcell Method rotated the hull form on its axis allowing the superstructure and legs to act upon the hull form
in its natural state in that condition. The moments and VCG obtained by the Loadcell are the exact values that it
took to produce the heeling action and thus the correct VCG.
5163
or
Weight Method corrected:
1.
5653
or
Loadcell Method:
1.
5454
or
1
8
.
1
9
5
6
1
8
.
7
8
3
6
1
8
.
5
4
4
8
25 of 26
EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Conclusion;
The use of the Weight Method is flawed by the falsely imposed moment verses the VCG of the weights; this is
due to the lack of back calculating the falsely imposed moment of the weight itself. It has been shown above that
the weights have had an erratic effect on the hull form within a single incline by increasing and then decreasing
the volume of the hull thus giving a non-l
i
ne
rr
e
s
ul
t
.Ther
e
s
ul
twa
sde
pe
nde
ntont
he
vol
umet
oa
xi
sr
a
t
i
oa
s
shown; any standard calculations used today do not take this into account. The Loadcell on the other hand gave
t
hes
a
mec
ons
i
s
t
e
ntd
a
t
awi
t
houtt
he
a
dde
dl
e
ve
r
a
g
e
e
f
f
e
c
toft
he
vol
umet
oa
xi
sr
a
t
i
os
howni
nt
hewe
i
g
ht
move
me
nt
s
.Thi
sd
a
t
apr
oduc
e
damor
ea
c
c
ur
a
t
eVCGa
sde
mons
t
r
a
t
e
di
nt
he
Ba
l
a
nc
i
ngTe
s
t
oft
hepan. It also
demonstrates that the Loadcell method is rotating the hull form about its axis verses the volume of displacement
t
hust
he
vol
umet
oa
xi
sr
a
t
i
oi
sr
e
ma
i
ni
ngc
ons
t
a
ntt
ot
hehul
lf
or
ma
ndwe
i
g
htt
husa
l
l
owi
ngt
heVCGoft
he
mass about the axis to act in a true and consistent manner. When employing the Loadcell to generate the heeling
mome
ntt
heve
s
s
e
lc
a
nbet
e
s
t
e
di
ni
t
s
t
r
ue
l
i
g
ht
s
hi
pc
ondi
t
i
ons
uc
ha
sar
e
c
e
nt
l
ybui
l
tve
s
s
e
lj
us
tl
a
unc
he
d.The
loadcell is also unlimited in its use, degrees of heel can be matched to the testers wishes and the resistance values
of the hull can be read, example of this is the tester wishes to test the vessel at 0.5, the elevation of the loadcell
can be raised to make the vessel heeling angle match the 0.5 and the resistance reading can be taken in pounds
or tons, this can be repeated as many times as the tester wants. Additionally, some vessels can not be inclined to
the full 4 as stated in the ASTM specifications due to the weight needed to produce the moment, in the case of
the newer liftboats it can be as much or more then 75,000 lbs of weights, with a loadcell it would be simply be
the case of using a calibrated loadcell of 100k lb. As seen above, we recreated the heel of the original Weight
Inclines degree of heeling with the Loadcell. This also could be an invaluable tool for recreating previous inclines
to see what went wrong or to verify the VCG in a timely efficient manner.
In our testing on Real World vessels, such as Fishing Vessels we found that the time taken to fully incline a
vessel in this manner, using our electronic data collection equipment in conjunction, was less than thirty (30)
minutes to perform the test on both sides for the full incline. This allows for less environmental intrusion into the
results of the incline.
Authored and Testing by;

Edwin M. Carlsen Chuck
Mays
26 of 26

Testing Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Testing Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Designer of Commercial Vessels USCG COI & Classed

Phone 228-863-1772 202 Alyce Pl.

REPORT ON TESTING OF INCLINE METHODS

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Theory of Weight Procedure

Theory of Loadcell Procedure

TEST TANK & EQUIPMENT

TANK SETUP & TEST START

INCLINE OF Liftboat Replica Model

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Holder Arm & Cable for the degree indicator # 6

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Readout & controller for # 2, readout set to 0.00000 of an inch.

Lead test weights.

Steel test weights.

Steel incline weights. TANK

SETUP & TEST START

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Comparison of both methods;

As shown the degree of heel difference was kept to a minimum, with M4

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

THE FOLLOWING CHARTS SHOW THE COMPARESON BETWEEN BOTH METHODS.

CALCULATIONS FOR VCG, TCB, TCF, TKM:

Wtm TCB' Lcm TCB' Wtm TCF' Lcm TCF'

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

VESSEL: Baker's Secret

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

As shown the degree of heel difference was kept to a minimum, with

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

VOLUME DISPLACEMENT CHANGE:

In the Wtm column you will note that the cubic

THE FOLLOWING CHARTS SHOW THE COMPARESON BETWEEN BOTH METHODS.

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Lcm TCB' Wtm TCF'

Lcm TCF' Wtm TKM'

CALCULATIONS FOR VCB, VCF, DRAFT, VOLUME FT^3:

s Pan were made that there is

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Added weights for

Incline Test weights movement mat.

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

As shown the degree of heel was matched in every movement.

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

Wtm surface ch. Lcm surface ch.

VOLUME DISPLACEMENT CHANGE:

THE FOLLOWING CHARTS SHOW THE COMPARESON BETWEEN BOTH METHODS.

Note in both methods and back calculation, that the

CALCULATIONS FOR VCB, VCF, DRAFT, VOLUME FT^3:

Lcm VCB' Wtm VCF'

Lcm VCF' Wtm Draft'

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha

CALCULATIONS FOR VCG, TCB, TCF, TKM:

1: 0.62 0.62 1.5070

2: 1.12 1.12 1.5216

3: 1.52 1.52 1.5188

4: 1.76 1.76 1.5176

EMCsq Vessel Wrytha